Our Current Starting Lineup Does Not Look Good

[jason21nl]

There is no doubt in my mind that pitchers pitch differently based on the batter behind them. If they didn't there would never be intentional walks-but its about game situation. Early in the game Weeks probably wouldn't see much difference in pitches but late in a tight game he more than likely would see better pitches with Braun behind him rather than Gomez.

[PrinceEatMeat]

There is no doubt in my mind that pitchers pitch differently based on the batter behind them. If they didn't there would never be intentional walks-but its about game situation. Early in the game Weeks probably wouldn't see much difference in pitches but late in a tight game he more than likely would see better pitches with Braun behind him rather than Gomez.

Completely agree. I think it matters a lot. Case in point is Fielder getting walked a lot. Last year McGehee made pitchers pay a lot, so the intentional walks lessened some, but this year it seems to be starting again. It's a lot about who is behind you in most situations. I agree that early in games it isn't that big of a deal, but as the game goes on it really matters.

[Funketown]

They certainly pitch different players differently, but it does not seem to lead to each player being more or less productive.

 

For reference, take a gander at this: http://jse.sagepub.com/content/9/2/211.abstract. "Using play-by-play data the authors find evidence contrary to the protection hypothesis—the quality of the on-deck hitter negatively impacts the preceding hitter—though the magnitude of the effect is very small".

 

Edit: I just realized that article may be a pain to get a hold of. Oh well.

[jason21nl]

I didn't read it so please forgive me if it is mentioned in there but does the study take in account all the batters in a line up? Because some on deck hitters are a little more scary than others in a line up. For example, Weeks followed by Braun is more scary than Weeks followed by Gomez and when you get lower in the line up, Betancourt followed by Nieves or whoever isn't scary at all.

 

 

I'm trying to pay attention to the crappy basketball game so I don't know what I'm trying to say is coming through very clear.

[logan82]

Is it significant? A very small difference could just be random.

[Baldkin]

 

The results lead us to not only reject the protection hypothesis, but
also we find evidence that good on-deck hitters actually harm the hit
and power probabilities of the current batter. This is consistent with
the effort hypothesis. However, the magnitude of the spillover is tiny
and for all practical purposes the effect is zero. Even very good (bad)
hitters have only a very small impact on the batters who precede them.

“But what about [insert possible excluded variable]?” Well, we
controlled for a heck of lot of potential outside influences: platoon
effects of the batter and the on-deck batter, the base/out
configuration, the quality of the pitcher, the score differential, the
inning of the game, and the park in which the game was played. Given the
number of observations we are convinced that protection is a myth; it
doesn’t exist.

http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/index.php/2004/09/the-protection-externality-it-doesnt-exist/

 

[Ennder]

There is no doubt in my mind that pitchers pitch differently based on the batter behind them. If they didn't there would never be intentional walks-but its about game situation. Early in the game Weeks probably wouldn't see much difference in pitches but late in a tight game he more than likely would see better pitches with Braun behind him rather than Gomez.

Completely agree. I think it matters a lot. Case in point is Fielder getting walked a lot. Last year McGehee made pitchers pay a lot, so the intentional walks lessened some, but this year it seems to be starting again. It's a lot about who is behind you in most situations. I agree that early in games it isn't that big of a deal, but as the game goes on it really matters.

Fielder was IBB more in the 2nd half than the 1st, this really played no role in it.

[danzig6767]

Sorry, but I really don't believe that Braun would have as much success if Fielder wasn't hitting behind him. It's been proved before when they tried flipping them a few times. I think it does make a difference who is hitting behind who. That's not to say that Braun wouldn't still be great, but I think Fielder behind him helps him see more good pitches. Braun behind Rickie would make a difference in my opinion.

Prince Fielder hit 50 home runs in 2007, the most in his career and had a 1.013 OPS with guys like Estrada, Mench, and Hall hitting after him much of the season. In 2008 with Hart batting 5th all year, Prince had only 36 homers and a .879 OPS. Albert Pujols has had a fabulous year with very little deviation each season in the bigs, regardless if the guy batting after him was really good or just mediocre.

 

In the vast majority of at bats, a pitcher doesn't decide to throw more of certain pitches to a batter depending on who is up next. A pitcher throws what pitches he thinks makes it most likely to get the guy out at the plate. Sure, maybe a great hitter will receive a few more intentional walks in a season with a mediocre hitter batting after him, but in those same 2007/2008 seasons, Prince drew 86 walks in 2007 with mediocre at best guys batting after him most of the year and 90 in 2008 with Hart batting 5th. Four more walks and much worse overall production.

 

If Weeks were hitting in the two spot instead of leadoff, i don't see any reason that he'd be pitched differently. In either spot, the pitcher will badly want to get Rickie out two simple reasons. First, just to get one more of the 27 outs needed to win a game. Next, to keep Rickie off base for Braun and potential Fielder.

[danzig6767]

Good to see Nyjer Morgan starting today, although Roenicke did say that Kotsay will start Tuesday because he "matches up well against Derek Lowe"

 

Gomez will probably start on Tuesday even though he doesn't match up well with Derek Lowe.

 

Also, how does Kotsay match up well with Lowe? He throws a sinker and Kotsay is a specialist at grounding out weakly, so yeah I guess that is a solid matchup...for the Braves.

I cringe when i hear managers say that kind of stuff except in select instances. It's certainly possible that Kotsay could end up getting a hit or two vs Lowe, but i don't think it will have anything to do with it being because he "matches up well against Derek Lowe." As you said, Kotsay has looked every bit his age in his 7 at bats besides the one line drive to center. Morgan is vastly superior defensively. Morgan has more speed on the bases.

 

So even though Morgan is far from a great player, i simply can't grasp how Roenicke can in his mind feel that Kotsay should not only get the majority of starts over Morgan, he would also keep batting Gomez 2nd in any game, much less one where Nyger started and has a career .345 OBP vs .293 for Gomez. It head scratching thinking.

[WV Brew]

You're all missing the obvious. Gindl is a better option than Kotsay or Morgan. Cut Kotsay and play Gindl in right until Hart gets back and then return Gindl to Nashville.

[Funketown]

You're all missing the obvious. Gindl is a better option than Kotsay or Morgan. Cut Kotsay and play Gindl in right until Hart gets back and then return Gindl to Nashville.

At this point, I agree that Gindl>Kotsay, but what makes you think Gindl>Morgan?

[monty57]

Didn't Gindl miss a bunch of ST with a hamstring injury? He might not be up to task due to that. He (and Schafer) are at least close to MLB-ready, and I certainly hope we aren't dragging out some gimpy has-been in front of them at this point next season. If we brought someone else up right now to take Kotsay or Reed's roster spot, my vote would be for Boggs. Of course, if that was the plan, we would've just went with him out of ST. I doubt four games and a handful of PAs will change Melvin & Roenicke's minds.

[rluzinski]

Platoon Morgan and Gomez. until Hart comes back, anyone but Kotsay in RF, as he can't hit OR field. Fish around for a no hit, slick fielding SS.

 

That's all I have.

[monty57]

Fish around for a no hit, slick fielding SS.

 

We had one, and thought it was more important to keep Kotsay and Reed on the roster, so we let him go to Texas.

 

Is there anyone right now who would rather have Kotsay and Reed than Boggs and Cruz?

[Funketown]

^Doug Melvin, apparently.

[Hate those Rodents]

Is there any reason not to do a strict platoon with both Gomez/Morgan AND YuBet/Counsell?

[cwolf2012]

With Yun-E6/Counsell, you have to worry about Counsell being able to hold up for 70% of the starts. That's the only reason I can see why you wouldn't do the latter.

 

There's no reason I can see not to do the former except this ridiculous notion that Gomez will somehow improve and figure out how to hit.

[Hate those Rodents]

I keep hearing that Counsell will break down if forced to play a lot. I'm not convinced of it. I think it's worth testing to see how well he can handle a sizable workload anyway. And I don't hate YuBet as much as most. But I do feel a platoon would be best for the team.

[PrinceEatMeat]

I really don't think it's a good idea to put Counsell in a platoon with Betancourt. It's a good idea to give Craig starts against righties every 3 or 4 days though. We face a lot more righties than we do lefties, so Craig would end up playing most of the time. I don't see him being able to handle that well, especially when he is needed to backup 2B and 3B as well. A Morgan/Gomez platoon is definitely going to happen, sooner rather than later. It's pretty inevitable at this point.

[rluzinski]

I keep hearing that Counsell will break down if forced to play a lot. I'm not convinced of it. I think it's worth testing to see how well he can handle a sizable workload anyway. And I don't hate YuBet as much as most. But I do feel a platoon would be best for the team.

You can fish around for the quotes but the last couple of years, Counsell hasn't been scared to admit he can't play everyday. Seems like even a straight platoon would be pushing it but who knows.

[danzig6767]

I keep hearing that Counsell will break down if forced to play a lot. I'm not convinced of it. I think it's worth testing to see how well he can handle a sizable workload anyway. And I don't hate YuBet as much as most. But I do feel a platoon would be best for the team.

You can fish around for the quotes but the last couple of years, Counsell hasn't been scared to admit he can't play everyday. Seems like even a straight platoon would be pushing it but who knows.

I'd agree that it's very unlikely that Counsell could handle a strict RH/LH platoon to where he'd start 100 plus games, but maybe something like out of every 10 games, Craig plays 4-5 of those games with all coming vs a RH starter. He should be able to handle starting around 75-80 games, especially if few to none are back to back.

[The Truth]

Love seeing that Morgan went 3 for 4 with a triple to push the issue

[trwi7]

The triple wasn't really a triple. Heyward either lost it in the lights or just plain missed it and McLouth did a terrible job of backing up the play and let the ball get by him.

[logan82]

The triple wasn't really a triple. Heyward either lost it in the lights or just plain missed it and McLouth did a terrible job of backing up the play and let the ball get by him.

Most triples are the result of a fielder misfielding a ball. However, unless a ball actually hits you on the fly in the outfield it isn't going to be called an error.

 

 

[trwi7]

Oh I know it's not going to be called an error, just saying that was really a weak triple. He hit it what, 225 feet maybe?